Overall Program Assessment - Agriculture Forestry and Fishing Research at NIOSH - page 45

capacity within Education and Research Centers and the Ag Centers (1988 Institute
of Agricultural Medicine and Occupational Health), conducted annual training
since 1996 of healthcare professionals who prevent and treat occupational illnesses
and injuries occurring on agricultural premises, studied violence prevention within
rural areas (1992 Conference on Handgun Injuries: A Public Health Approach),
and responded to the agricultural tractor-related death and injury crisis in the
United States (1997 Tractor Risk Abatement and Control: The Policy Conference)
(Donham et al., 1998). Both the High Plains Intermountain Center for Agricultural
Health and Safety and the Southwest Center for Agricultural Health and Safety co-
sponsored a national conference examining worker health issues associated with
agro-terrorism in 2004. Additionally, the Southeast Center for Agricultural Health
and Injury Prevention led the effort from 2005-2007 to assess farmer and rancher
attitudes towards retrofitting older agricultural tractors as a part of the National
Agricultural Tractor Safety Initiative. The Western Center for Agricultural Safety
and Health assembled a multi-disciplinary team from the United States and Canada
in 2006 to assess the ergonomic and anthropometric parameters of the North
American Guidelines for Children's Agricultural Tasks (NAGCAT) pertaining to
tractor operations.
In January 2007, the High Plains Intermountain Center for Agricultural Health
and Safety prepared a report evaluating the 10 Ag Centers, and found that the centers
collectively produced over 800 products and reached about 4.2 million people.
Responsiveness to Stakeholder Input
Much of the interaction between AFF Program personnel and stakeholders oc-
curs at formal meetings, conferences, and symposia and through NORA town hall
gatherings. It is apparent that there is also extensive interaction among investiga-
tors and research staff and the stakeholders who partner or participate in research
activities. There are numerous examples in the project descriptions of activities
that undoubtedly provide opportunities for stakeholders to offer input. However,
despite those opportunities and NIOSH's response to stakeholder input, only a
small fraction of all stakeholders participated in the process and felt that they were
actively engaged in AFF Program efforts.
There is also a conceptual gap between seeking stakeholder involvement and
actually engaging stakeholders, given the large numbers of AFF workers. Convening
a conference or a public gathering, in the manner generally used by federal agen-
cies, normally brings “the usual suspects” to the forefront. Advocacy groups claim
to speak on behalf of various AFF workers and are often readily able to participate
in the types of gatherings described above, whereas a paucity of AFF workers speak
on their own behalf. This gap is not entirely the fault of the agency; it is difficult to